I disagree. First, this is really just a proof of concept. Nobody is going to argue that it was intended to "compete" on a feature-by-feature checklist with current 2D browsers. Second, you have a limited imagination. It could be very useful for kiosk-type applications, advertising, modest games, improved accessibility (ie. for people with handicaps, reduced screen real estate, etc), raster and geometry effects for 2D applications, etc. Particularly when you consider that its real usefulness may come from providing an API set to devs rather than a client app -- and the fact that much of the install base will already have the prerequisite bits on their boxes (ie. minimal additional special runtimes to download/install).

raver31 might have a "limited imagination", yours though is through the roof. improved accessibility (ie. for people with handicaps, reduced screen real estate, etc)[i]
emmm that would just make things worse.
[i] It could be very useful for kiosk-type applications, advertising we dont need more of that thank you raster and geometry effects for 2D applications
emm.. also no. different libraries.

so it looks like you are one of them Kool-Aid guys raver31 was talking about